ARCHER DANIELS: Jury May Hear Tape Recordings in Civil Cases------------------------------------------------------------The Associated Press reported that a federal judge in Peoria, Illinois, has ruled that some of the tape recordings barred in the criminal price-fixing case against executives of Archer Daniels Midland Co. can be released to attorneys for possible use in the civil case.

According to the account, U.S. District Judge Michael Mihm ruled last week that tapes made secretly by former ADM vice president Mark Whitacre can be subpoenaed by plaintiffs in the case, but he excluded recorded telephone calls. The tapes, made over two and a half years, contain conversations of executives discussing business practices. Lawyers for several food companies and soft drink bottlers that buy high-fructose corn syrup, a sweetener, want the tapes introduced as evidence to show a pattern of price fixing, explained AP.

Customers of ADM and its competitors in the corn syrup market allege they were harmed by price fixing and have filed more than two dozen class-action lawsuits being heard by Mihm, according to the report. The companies are seeking damages from grain processors including ADM and A.E. Staley Manufacturing Co., Cargill Inc. and American Maize Products Co.

The AP also noted that in 1995, ADM agreed to pay a $100 million fine after pleading guilty to price-fixing involving lysine and citric acid. And in a criminal trial last year, Michael Andreas, the son of ADM Chairman Emeritus Dwayne Andreas, was convicted of conspiracy price fixing along with Terrance Wilson, former head of ADM's corn division. The report said that they have yet to be sentenced.

AP said Whitacre is serving a nine-year sentence for swindling ADM out of $9 million and stashing the money in foreign accounts. A trial date has not been set for the civil cases.

Card News says that the plaintiffs attorneys are seeking refunds for what could be "hundreds of thousands" of cardholders who were charged an APR of more than 24 percent, the cap under Maryland law, and for those charged excess fees -- a sum that could total in the millions of dollars. The suit says the thrift originally promised cardholders their interest rates would never exceed 24 percent, the maximum under Maryland law. In addition, the thrift reportedly guaranteed cardholders that it would comply with Maryland consumer credit laws, which require banks to provide specific written notice of any proposed amendments to cardholder agreements and give cardholders the chance to opt out of them and pay off balances according to the old terms.

Problems began when Chevy Chase moved its headquarters to McLean, Va., a state which has no interest rate cap, according to Card News. The suit alleges the thrift, immediately and without notice, tried to amend the agreement to make Virginia law apply, eliminating its promise not to charge more than a 24 percent APR. Chevy Chase was said to have also increased other charges and added new late-payment and over-the-limit fees even for cardholders who had amassed balances before the thrift moved to Virginia.

The Card News story says Chevy Chase Bank would not comment on the case, save for a statement issued by Leslie Nicholson, Chevy Chase Bank's executive vice president and general counsel. The statement reportedly says the thrift believes it was within its rights in its treatment of cardholders: "... Chevy Chase Bank believes that [cardholders'] complaints will be dismissed because the bank complied with applicable federal and state laws in making the changes in early 1996 that are now being challenged."

"This legal matter will be concluded in the bank's favor," Nicholson was reported to say.

CHS ELECTRONICS: Klari Neuwelt Files Complaint in Florida---------------------------------------------------------On March 25, 1999, the Law Office of Klari Neuwelt filed a class action lawsuit in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida on behalf of purchasers of common stock of CHS Electronics Inc. (NYSE: HS) from June 19, 1998 through March 19, 1999.

The complaint charges CHS and certain of its officers and directors with violations of Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as well as SEC Rule 10b-5. The complaint alleges that CHS issued materially false and misleading financial statements for the last three quarters of its 1998 fiscal year. The financial statements are alleged to be false and misleading because they improperly credited vendor rebates, in violation of Generally Accepted Accounting Principles, thereby materially overstating CHS' profits. The complaint alleges that the market price of CHS common stock was artificially inflated until March 22, 1999, when CHS announced that it would restate and revise its financial results substantially downward. Upon that announcement, the market price of CHS stock plunged.

COMPAQ COMPUTER: Milberg Weiss Files Complaint in Texas-------------------------------------------------------The law firm of Milberg Weiss Bershad Hynes & Lerach filed a class action lawsuit in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas on behalf of all purchasers of the common stock of Compaq Computer Corp. (NYSE: CPQ) between January 27, 1999, and February 25, 1999.

The complaint alleges that defendants issued a series of false statements and failed to disclose material facts concerning the Company's operating results and its future prospects.

COMPLETE MANAGEMENT: Bernstein Liebhard Files Suit in New York--------------------------------------------------------------Bernstein Liebhard & Lifshitz, LLP has filed a securities class action lawsuit on behalf of purchasers of the common stock and convertible debentures of Complete Management, Inc. (OTC Bulletin Board: CPMI) between May 1, 1996 and August 13, 1998, in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York.

The lawsuit alleges violations of the federal securities laws and names as defendants the company, certain of its officers and directors, its accountants, and underwriters. The complaint charges the defendants with violations of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5.

The complaint alleges that the defendants improperly recognized revenue on uncollectible receivables from its largest customer, Greater Metropolitan Medical Services ("GMMS") in violation of Generally Accepted Accounting Principles. On August 13, 1998, CMI announced that it would be writing off approximately $28.9 million in management fees due from GMMS and would be terminating its relationship with GMMS. Plaintiffs claim that as a result of these misrepresentations and omissions, the price of CMI's common stock was artificially inflated.

According to the company, the cash portion of the proposed settlement would be fully funded by insurance carriers and not from company funds. Additionally, the proposed settlement with respect to the issuance of warrants at $9, $10, and $11 per share was fully reserved for in the company's prior fiscal year, ended March 31, 1998.

No further charges are anticipated by the company. The settlement proposal reportedly fairly reflects the agreement by the parties and was previously disclosed and accounted for during Coyote Network Systems prior fiscal year.

HOLOCAUST SURVIVORS: France Seeks Dismissal of US Lawsuits----------------------------------------------------------The Associated Press reported that France has asked a U.S. federal court to drop two class action lawsuits filed by Americans against French banks, saying they are hampering efforts to achieve full restitution of wartime assets.

The AP says the French Foreign Ministry confirmed it had filed a legal brief charging that the U.S. litigation was "misguided and wrong" and "interferes with current efforts of the French government to achieve a complete, thorough and complete resolution of all unresolved issues caused by the Holocaust in France." The French Banking Association was said to have released excerpts from the legal brief.

According to the AP, a group of Holocaust survivors living in the United States sued French banks last year seeking to recover their families' assets. The banks named in the class action suit are: Credit Lyonnais, Banque Paribas; the French subsidiary of Barclay's Bank; Societe Generale; Banque National de Paris; Credit Commerical de France; Credit Agricole; Banque Francaise du Commerce Exterieur, and Banque Worms Capital Corp. In December, Barclay's Bank created a fund for the repayment of assets that were held in its French subsidiary during World War II and not recovered by the rightful owners after the war.

The AP wrote that France resents outside lobbying concerning Holocaust restitution and believes that the state-appointed panel of experts currently studying the systematic looting of Jewish property during the war will help recover frozen assets and funds still in national financial institutions.

The banking association reportedly issued a statement that said France's way of confronting its past and addressing the accountability of its own state institutions "is a matter of fundamental political and historical importance to the French people." The banking association has announced measures to make sure that bank accounts seized from Jews during World War II would be returned to their heirs or used to create a Holocaust education center. The measures were said to have marked the first major initiative from the banks, which have long been accused of benefiting from the unclaimed accounts.

However, AP noted that this relief may not come soon enough for many aging and financially troubled Jews who were orphaned during the war. Most received no postwar compensation and are now demanding a pension, according to the story. The report said the banking association claimed that about $55.5 million in assets was confiscated and frozen by French banks obeying the anti-Jewish laws passed by the collaborationist Vichy regime. It said most of those assets were returned after the war and it is not known how much the banks hold today.

In its Memorandum of Law submitted as Amicus Curiae (a "friend of the court"), the French government' charged that:

-- The U.S. lawsuits "directly affect France's sovereign interests by seeking damages for activities that occurred during World War II in which participated the de facto authorities which exercised their power on the national territory and which styled themselves 'the government of the French state,' and by addressing issues of fundamental policy concern to the French government today."

-- The Republic of France "has a paramount interest in formulating and implementing its own policies towards the victims of that period. How it chooses to confront its past, and to address the accountability of its own state institutions, is a matter of fundamental political, and indeed historical, importance to the French people."

-- The U.S. lawsuits will "inevitably interfere with, and hamper, the very thorough, complex, and far-reaching efforts that the French government, working together with other French institutions, is making to address this history."

-- The U.S. lawsuits are "illusory" and "incapable of providing comprehensive relief" because they "involve only a small number of the banks that did business in France during the Occupation and are still in business today" and "plaintiffs and their lawyers will not have access to French governmental files and other documents available only in France and through French governmental processes."

The brief says, "There is no reason to believe that a class action proceeding in New York will be better able than the Republic of France itself to locate, identify, and provide benefits to victims of the Holocaust in France on a comprehensive, worldwide basis." Accordingly, the brief concludes, "the Republic of France strongly believes that the plaintiffs' efforts ... to address the Holocaust in France through American class action litigation are misguided and wrong." For a copy of the French Government's amicus brief or more information, contact: Michael Freitag or Jason Lynch, French Bankers Association Kekst and Company 212-521-4800.

INFORMATION ANALYSIS: Abbey Gardy Files Complaint in Virginia-------------------------------------------------------------The law firm of Abbey, Gardy & Squitieri, LLP has filed a complaint in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, on behalf of all purchasers of Information Analysis, Inc. (Nasdaq: IAIC) common stock between February 26, 1998 and September 28, 1998.

The complaint charges that IAI and certain officers and directors violated Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 by issuing a series of materially false and misleading financial statements and failing to reveal that the company's touted strategic expansion was insufficient to keep up with a growing backlog of Year 2000 projects. It was not until later that the company announced that it had insufficient resources to complete current projects and to recognize revenue from backlogged orders.

MONEY STORE: Saperstein Goldstein Files Complaint in California---------------------------------------------------------------The law firm of Saperstein, Goldstein, Demchak & Baller filed a class action lawsuit against The Money Store and First Union Corp. on behalf of five current and former loan officers and assistant branch managers. The complaint, filed in Superior Court in Sacramento, states that The Money Store and First Union have violated California state law since at least March 30, 1995, by failing to pay required overtime wages to hundreds of finance employees in its Sacramento offices and retail stores in California.

The Money Store, a pioneer in the business of home equity loans, employs approximately 4,500 employees in Sacramento and in an estimated 200 offices throughout the United States and the United Kingdom. In 1997, The Money Store reported total revenues of $830 million. First Union Corp., a North Carolina banking and financial services company headquartered in Charlotte, bought The Money Store in June 1998 for $2.1 billion. In December 1997, First Union settled an age discrimination class action for $58.5 million.

According to plaintiffs, Money Store loan officers and assistant branch managers typically worked ten or more hours a day from Monday through Friday and often Saturdays as well. "We worked 50 to 60 hours per week, but received a salary based on only 40 hours," said plaintiff Eric Davis of Rancho Cordova, Calif.

"These workers were misclassified as 'exempt' from the overtime laws although they clearly fall outside the legal definition of exempt executive or administrative employees," said David Borgen, the plaintiffs' attorney with Saperstein, Goldstein, Demchak & Baller. "This seems to be a pattern in the financial services industry," said Borgen, noting the multimillion-dollar settlements in similar cases against Wells Fargo Bank.

The plaintiffs will ask the court to certify a class of all Money Store/First Union loan officers and assistant branch managers employed in California. It is estimated that the class may include as many as a thousand employees. Money Store/First Union employees in other states are not currently included in this lawsuit.

The plaintiffs' complaint does not state a specific value for the class claims. Borgen states, however, that "Wells Fargo recently agreed to settle similar claims for $6.1 million and Pacific Bell settled a similar overtime class action in 1996 for $28 million." Plaintiffs also seek an injunction to compel The Money Store to start paying overtime compensation and a declaratory judgment to void an unconscionable mandatory arbitration program.

SEARS ROEBUCK: Settlement Includes $7.50 Coupons for 11 Million---------------------------------------------------------------In a story copyrighted by Phillips Publishing, Inc., Card News reported on the recent $36 million settlement of a class-action suit by Ill.-based Sears, Roebuck and Co.

According to the report, Sears and its subsidiary, Sears National Bank, N.A., settled Henry v. Sears (Civil No. C-98-4110) by paying out approximately $36 million in cash to about 3 million customers. Sears allegedly increased the APRs on these customers pre-existing balances as a result of a 1997 change in credit terms. The settlement is expected to resolve two related lawsuits, Kistler v. Sears and Theiss v. Sears.

Card News describes the Henry action as being brought on behalf of a nationwide group of Sears credit customers who had outstanding balances when their accounts were transferred to Sears National Bank from 1994 through 1996, and as of the effective dates of an April 1997 notice of change in credit terms. Previously, there had been no change in the APR assessed on the outstanding balances before they were transferred to Sears' bank. The change in terms dictated that any remaining balances carrying a lower APR than Sears National Bank's were now subject to a 21 percent rate. Card News reported that the cardholders' claimed that earlier notices mailed to them included a commitment not to increase the rate on the pre-transfer balances.

The report says that Sears settled the suit because winning in court would do nothing to win back the goodwill of cardholders. "We believe the rate change was proper," Card News quotes Jan Drummond, a Sears spokeswoman, as saying, "but in retrospect, some customers may have misunderstood the initial communication and misinterpreted it as a commitment to not raise rates on existing balances."

Card News reported that the $36 million settlement breaks down to 11 million people receiving a $7.50 coupon good at Sears stores, which Drummoned confirmed to be a goodwill gesture. According to the story, the legal action also prompted the issuer to re-examine communications materials sent out to cardholders, including cardholder agreements. In the future, Sears will try to make communications as un-ambiguous as possible. Sears will reportedly go through its cardholder agreements trying to pinpoint statements it makes that could somehow be understood by a cardholder "as 180-degrees off its original meaning," says Drummond. "The other point is, even if have a modest settlement per class member, when you talk about the kinds of numbers [of cardholders serviced by] national issuers, we're talking about a lot at stake here," she was quoted as saying.

STAFFMARK, INC.: Weiss & Yourman Files Complaint in Arkansas------------------------------------------------------------The law firm of Weiss & Yourman has filed a class action lawsuit against StaffMark, Inc. (Nasdaq: STAF) in the United States District Court for the Western District of Arkansas, on behalf of investors who purchased StaffMark shares in the period July 6, 1997 through March 2, 1999.

The complaint charges StaffMark and certain its officers and directors with violations of Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. It alleges that StaffMark misrepresented: (a) its ability to integrate the acquisitions that the Company had made during the Class Period; (b) the adequacy of its infrastructure; (c) its ability to meet analysts' earnings expectations; (d) the adequacy of its controls; and (e) its ability to continue to make further acquisitions of other companies. On March 2, 1999, StaffMark reported it would miss analysts' earnings expectations by a significant margin for the first quarter and year 1999, and admitted, among other things, that it would have to slow down its acquisition program for the rest of 1999.

StaffMark common stock had recently traded as high as over $42.00 per share. In the days following the March 2, 1999 announcement, the price of StaffMark common stock plunged to $8.50 per share, losing approximately 80% of its value from its recent high.

TOBACCO LITIGATION: $81 Mil. Verdict for Dedicated Marlboro Man---------------------------------------------------------------The Associated Press reported on the biggest liability verdict ever against the tobacco industry: on Tuesday a jury ordered Philip Morris to pay $81 million to the family of a man who died of lung cancer after smoking Marlboros for four decades. The victory by the wife and children of Jesse Williams was the second major hit against Philip Morris this year. A San Francisco jury awarded $51.5 million last month to a Marlboro smoker who has inoperable lung cancer, according to the report.

AP says that the Oregon jury, which found Williams and the company to be equally negligent, awarded $1.6 million in compensatory damages and $79.5 million in punitive damages.

Although no smoking liability verdict against the tobacco industry has survived on appeal, the report explained that Wall Street analysts had been watching the Portland case closely to see if huge damage awards against Big Tobacco were now a trend. "It will make the stocks go down," said Gary Black, an industry analyst with the New York brokerage firm Sanford C. Bernstein & Co. The report continued, "This will persuade the industry to start thinking the tide may be turning."

The Williams family, who sought $101 million, alleged the company knew its cigarettes could cause cancer. The AP described the testimony as portraying Williams, a former janitor with the Portland school system, as a three-pack-a-day Marlboro smoker who believed the manufacturer wouldn't sell a harmful product and who was heavily addicted to nicotine. Williams died in 1997 just five months after he was diagnosed with small- cell carcinoma of the lungs. He was 67 and left behind a wife, Mayola, and six adult children.

"My late husband Jesse Williams had a dying wish," said Mrs. Williams in the AP story. "He wanted to make cigarette companies stop lying about the health problems of smokers."

Philip Morris attorney Walter Cofer said he will appeal and noted the tobacco industry has a 40-year history of prevailing in such cases. "If you look at this verdict, it was not supported by the evidence," Cofer said according to AP. "It was a product of passion and prejudice."

The 12-member Circuit Court jury, which included three smokers and four former smokers, reportedly spent a little more than two days reviewing a month of technical and often conflicting testimony from experts in such areas as cancer diagnosis, radiology and the chemistry of tobacco smoke.

Besides the San Francisco case, AP reports that U.S. juries have awarded damages in smoking liability cases only three times: twice in Florida and once in New Jersey. All three verdicts were overturned on appeal. "As little as three years ago most people thought the tobacco industry was invulnerable. This case shows we have a crack in the dam," John Banzhof was quoted as saying. Mr. Banzhof is the executive director of Action on Smoking and Health, a leading tobacco opponent.

In closing arguments in the Portland case, attorneys for the Williams family were said to have cited internal Philip Morris documents to bolster their claim that the company long knew about the cancer-causing potential of cigarettes and hid that information from its customers. The story noted that Cofer said Williams was well aware that smoking could harm his health and had been warned of that by doctors and family members.

AP reported that Philip Morris ended the day Tuesday as the biggest loser on the Dow industrial average, down 3 7/16 to 37, and it helped push other tobacco stocks down. The tobacco industry reached a $206 billion legal settlement with states in November, but cigarette makers still face individual and class-action claims.

TOTAL RENAL: Pomerantz Haudek Sues for Louisiana Teachers---------------------------------------------------------Pomerantz Haudek Block Grossman & Gross LLP, has sued Total Renal Care Holdings, Inc. (NYSE: TRL), for securities fraud on behalf of the State of Louisiana School Employees' Retirement System and all investors who acquired the company's securities during the period February 17, 1998 through February 17, 1999.

The complaint alleges that Total Renal Care and certain of its officers and directors violated Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 by issuing materially false and misleading statements concerning the company's operating performance in violation of Generally Accepted Accounting Principles ("GAAP"). The complaint specifically alleges that Total Renal Care understated expenses by amortizing goodwill associated with its acquisition of Renal Treatment Centers, Inc. over an improperly long period of time, and failed to write down millions in uncollectible Renal Treatment accounts receivables pending as of December 31, 1997.

The filing of the complaint followed Total Renal Care's announcement that it would take a charge of $12.3 million, of which fully $11.5 million represented the writedown of Renal Treatment's uncollectible accounts receivables. Moreover, the company stated that it was the target of an investigation by the Securities and Exchange Commission centering on its accounting practices, including its amortization of goodwill.

The market reacted to the news and in exceptionally heavy trading, the price of Total Renal Care common stock plunged by 58%, falling from $21.00 a share on February 16, 1999 to $8.75 a share on February 18, 1999.

This material is copyrighted and any commercial use, resale or publication in any form (including e-mail forwarding, electronic re-mailing and photocopying) is strictly prohibited without prior written permission of the publishers. Information contained herein is obtained from sources believed to be reliable, but is not guaranteed.

The CAR subscription rate is $575 for six months delivered via e-mail. Additional e-mail subscriptions for members of the same firm for the term of the initial subscription or balance thereof are $25 each. For subscription information, contact Christopher Beard at 301/951-6400.